Google+ Followers

Saturday, 3 December 2011

Atzmon Caught Using BNP Material to Attack Opponents

Atzmon On The Ropes As Criticism Take Its Toll

The praise that Atzmon regularly receives from neo-Nazis and far-Right sites has always made me suspect that he maintains regular contracts with white supremacists such as David Duke. However, despite being seen in the company of Michelle Renouf, a well known holocaust denier and friend of David Irving, Atzmon has been careful to keep a clean pair of hands.

Many of us suspected that Atzmon maintained links with the far-Right although it was difficult to prove. E.g. on the neo-Nazi Redwatch site, the South England Reds Section carries an article from Atzmon under the heading 'Interesting information found on a pro-Palestinian website concerning our old friend, the elusive Tony Greenstein (pictured right). It seems even his own 'comrades' see him as a Zionist stooge!'

Gilad Atzmon has now been caught red handed borrowing from a BNP site, in order to mount respond to criticism from Hope not Hate concerning his performance in Bradford for Raise Your Banners. And to compound his stupidity he changed the article on his site when people realised what he was up to, forgetting that all the conspiracy sites he mails his articles to were carrying the original!

Gilad Atzmon is doing his best to destroy the Palestine solidarity movement in this country. He has been able to garner support by pulling the wool over peoples’ eyes and trading on an unjustified reputation as a fighter for Palestinian rights. In particular he has cynically targeted Muslims. Although he is a crude anti-Semite, his attraction lies in being an ex-Israeli Jew opposed to the depredations of the Israeli state.

Atzmon is seen as an anti-Zionist although he makes no such claims himself. On the contrary, as he wrote in an e-mail of 22.9.11. to me:

‘ you are not Pls solidarity campaigners, you are merely anti Zionists ..’

The reason for the above statement is that Atzmon sees anti-Zionism as 'Jewish' even though, in order to do more than oppose particular policies of the Israeli Government or State, it is necessary to understand what it is you are fighting against. That is precisely why Israel demands recognition as a 'Jewish' i.e. Zionist State. Israel is not a 'normal' society gone wrong. Unlike other oppressive states it is a state not of its own citizens but of anyone claiming to be Jewish. That is what makes it Zionist. Whilst it is possible to support Palestinian rights and not be an anti-Zionist, it is like supporting the rights of Black people in South Africa but not opposing Apartheid.

Atzmon uses the Zionist claim that they act on behalf of the ‘Jewish nation’ to both justify and camouflage his anti-Semitism. He is only too happy to take at face value the Zionist claim that they represent all Jews. Indeed it was Jews who rejected Zionism (and therefore their ‘nationality’ – hence the Nazi term ‘self hater’ which Atzmon proudly proclaims himself to be) who Atzmon termed ‘crypto-Zionists.' The Zionists have long ‘weaponized’ anti-Semitism as a means of deflecting criticism of the subjugation and exploitation of the Palestinians. see ‘A few points for the occasion of the Atzmon saga going mainstream’, Gabriel Ash]

Atzmon has deliberately cultivated an air of radical chic, all of it fake. As an article I will be posting shortly shows, he uses Palestine, Palestinians and Islam as a means to bolster his career. He also uses dense and meaningless philosophical ramblings and jargon in order to distract attention from his underlying meaning. (see Commentary on the “Philosophical Thinking” of Gilad Atzmon Whilst Atzmon protests that he is in favour of free speech, he sees any criticism of him as ‘censorship’ and villifies those who dare criticise him. The vicious personal attack on Sarah Colborne, PSC Director, by Lauren Booth, is but one more example of how Atzmon and his friends prefer ad hominem attacks to dealing with the substance.

Since June 2005, when Jews Against Zionism picketed Atzmon’s meeting at Bookmarks, the SWP bookshop in London, a number of us have sought to highlight the dangers that Atzmon represents for the Palestine solidarity movement. Originally we had exposed the activities of a Soviet/Swedish neo-Nazi, Israel Shamir. Shamir's appointment as 'adviser' to the Deir Yassin Remembered group resulted in the resignations of Jeff Halper, Lea Tsemel and Michal Warshawski, all of them Israeli supporters of the Palestinians.

It is a great pity that PSC and its leadership four years ago rejected a resolution calling for the ostracism of Eisen, Atzmon and DYR. Masterminded by Betty Hunter, then chair, the Executive opposed a motion whose sentiments they supported, for sectarian reasons. It is another reason why PSC’s leadership should be more be more pluralistic.

Atzmon responded to our criticism of Shamir with an article, ‘Protocols of the Elders of London’ which described how ‘An ex-Jew, Shamir is a very civil and peaceful man and probably is the sharpest critical voice of ‘Jewish power’ and Zionist ideology.’ Israel Shamir is also a holocaust denier. In Who Needs Holocaust? he described Auschwitz ‘as an internment facility, attended by the Red Cross… This idea of “bombing Auschwitz” makes sense only if one accepts the vision of “industrial extermination factory”, and it was formed only well after the war.’I therefore sent Atzmon an e-mail by way of reply and the following conversation ensued (6.6.05.):

T: I understand that you have been distributing Paul Eisen's most recent The Holocaust Wars which denies, in the course of defending Ernest Zundel, that there ever was a holocaust or extermination of European Jewry by the Nazis.

G: Mr Greenstine, True I circulated Paul Eisen's paper. I do believe that argumentative texts must be circulated as widely as possible. I am sure that in case you have a counter argument to suggest Paul will be delighted to address it. By the way, my take on the subject is slightly different than Paul's one and yet, i found Paul very attentive to my criticism. Furthermore, Let me assure you that if I ever see agreat text written by yourself I ll be the first to circulate it. This is my way, that is what i believe in.Note how Atzmon’s take on the subject is ‘slightly different’ to Eisen’s eulogy to the neo-Nazi Ernst Zundel and Eisen's open avowal of holocaust denial. On 12.6.05. Atzmon sent me a further e-mail:‘Indeed I correspond with Shamir occasionally. I find him an extremely charming man and rather entertaining. But more to the point, my ties with Shamir are merely intellectual. I regard Shamir as a unique and advanced thinker. I am not a political ally of Shamir, inasmuch as I am not a political ally of anyone else. As you know, some might associate me with the SWP just because I will be performing at their event in a few weeks. But in fact I am not even a political member in the SWP. I admire their work and yet I am not a member in the party or in any other party, network or organisation…. The SWP is fully aware of me not being a Party member and they are totally fine with it. They have repeatedly said: ”Gilad, we do not agree with everything you say, but we believe that you should say what you believe in”.

Over the years the SWP became disenchanted with Atzmon’s increasingly open identification with the far-right, though they never had the courage or honesty to admit they got it wrong.

I Predicted That Support For Atzmon Would Damage the Palestine solidarity movement

As I wrote in Solidarity and SWP's favourite anti-semite quoting Ali Abunimah, ‘the fight against anti-Palestinian racism cannot afford to be sullied by anti-Jewish racism.’ I have repeatedly argued that I oppose Atzmon's anti-semitism not because it is harmful to Jews, but because it is destroys support for the Palestinians. Although of course we should oppose anti-Semitism and any form of racism in its own right, the fact is that a Palestine solidarity movement that has any truck with anti-Semitism has a death wish.

'Anti-Semitism is not a threat to Jews so much as a danger to Palestinians. Only Zionism benefits from anti-Semitism. It was anti-Semitism which pushed Jews out of Europe. It was Zionism which ensured that some of them went to Palestine.'

It is therefore no surprise that Atzmon would unleash his attack dogs, Lauren Booth and Laura Stuart, to attack PSC’s decision to have nothing to do with him. And what is clearly a desperate move, side-kick Sami Ibrahim, who was removed by other members as Chair of Birmingham PSC, has today accused me of being a Mossad Agent! http://www.shoah.org.uk/2011/12/03/is-tony-greenstein-a-mossad-agent/.

Laura Stuart it was who sent me, on 27th April 2011, a strange e-mail ‘Is this anti-Semitic’ with a link to just about the most vile racist videos it has been my misfortune to watch. ‘What Famous People Say About the Jews’. The one below and its counterpart feature Houston Stewart Chamberlain, (at whose funeral Hitler and Goebbels paid their respects in 1924), Martin Luther, Richard Wagner and Winston Churchill (an ardent Zionist who initially defended the Protocols of the Elders of Zion)

The fact that she was unable to understand that a video produced by Aryan5, (clue – something to do with Nazis Laura) was probably anti-Semitic, says a lot about her understanding of racism. Perhaps Laura might undertake to find out where the Nazis placed Arab on the racial ladder? In fact it was lower than the Jews. Having met her at the Norman Finkelstein meeting and having privately corresponded, it is clear that she doesn’t have a clue about what Zionism is, has little understanding of politics and is someone who is easily manipulated by Atzmon for his own private purposes.

Laura Stuart’s article is a classic example of how not to build a solidarity movement with the Palestinians. It sells the pass to Zionism. Instead of Zionism being a movement that was used by imperialism, we have the reverse. It is Zionism that controls the West. How does it gain this power? Well when you are in the conspiracy business you don't need to look for rationale explanations such as power politics, material interests, capitalism, the wealthy, etc. Stuart writes that:

With the amount of funding that our government receives from wealthy Jewish businessmen, and with wealthy Jewish businessmen donating heavily to Jewish interest lobby groups, it is no surprise that pro-Palestine campaigners are up against a formidable force. Not only do we have to expose and take on the Israeli government, but we also have to expose and take on the Western governments as well. How simple would it be for Western governments to insist that Israel comply with international law and so bring an end to a lot of misery and suffering of the Palestinians, but governments such as the UK’s for one seem terminally helpless when it comes to Israel.

The naivete is remarkable. How easy it would be, Stuart writes, if Western governments were to behave decently. But when have they behaved so? Is it in their interests to do so? Why should they behave differently than they did in South America, Ireland, Vietnam, South Africa etc. Using the bogey of Jewish business lets imperialism off the hook by focussing attention solely on Jewish capitalists. Stuart develops her conspiracy theory, explaining that:

‘The fact that Zionist interest groups are not confined to Israel-Palestine alone but reach out and shape Western foreign policy means that there can be no peace as long as the Zionist agenda is the oppression and complete subjugation of billions of people, every single one whom they believe is a security threat, or at least wish to portray as such.’

Zionists Enjoy the Spectacle of Atzmon’s Attack on the Palestine solidarity movement

Of course this has given the Zionist press and Zionists generally a field day. The Jewish Chronicle, is thoroughly enjoying the spectacle. In ‘Lauren Booth's attack points up new split in PSC’, we have the trite, superficial and overpaid Mark Gardner of the Community Security Trust, a Zionist vigilante group, proclaiming that Booth’s article ‘very usefully illustrates how Gilad Atzmon's emergence is forcing the anti-Israel movement to acknowledge its antisemitic demons; and then oppose them, or explicitly refuse to care.’

In fact Booth's article does no such thing. It is the Zionists who have demonstrated alongside the English Defence League and it was Gardner’s own CST which provided stewarding for the demonstration, outside the Israeli Embassy last year, to celebrate the murders on the Mavi Marmara. The Zionist Federation co-chair, Jonathan Hoffman, openly demonstrated outside Ahava with the EDL and was even criticised by the Union of Jewish Students’ Danny Sheldon for doing so, before massive pressure was put on him to recant. Sheldon stated in a debate at Leeds that:

‘This is a man who has called for a boycott of the Guardian; who wears crash helmets to peaceful pro-Israel demonstrations; and who is happy to demonstrate side-by-side with members of the EDL Jewish Division. He lied about that last one by saying the picture of him with the EDL was photoshopped, but - after a legal intervention - was forced to admit that the photo was completely genuine.’ UJS were forced to take the debate video and transcript off their site but they can be found here!

Gardner knows full well that the BNP and EDL support Israel in its attacks on Muslims. Palestinian supporters have no anti-Semitic ‘demons’. They are the property of those who talk of ‘Jewish vermin’ (Herzl, Pinhas Rosenbluth) .

The Real Reason Why the Zionists 'Oppose' Atzmon

The real clue to the Zionists’ intentions is the statement of Jon Benjamin, Chief Executive of the Board of Deputies:

"The question isn't whether the PSC will implode, but whether those within the trade union movement, the churches and NGOs, where the PSC have gained traction, will now see it for what it is, a nasty, rejectionist organisation that has no interest in peace and reconciliation between the Israeli and Palestinian people."

The Zionist aim is clear. It is to use the activities of Gilad Atzmon in order to attack the Palestine solidarity movement.

Given that Atzmon's supporters, notwithstanding a few crank professors, are not known for their intelligence, let me spell out the danger in as few syllables as possible. In recent years supporters of the Palestinians and anti-Zionists have made real gains in the trade union movement. Although there have been disagreements over tactics with PSC, e.g. over Histadrut, there can be no doubt that PSC has done some extremely good work. It is, without doubt, a concrete political achievement to have secured the affiliation of all the major trade unions in this country to PSC.

Support from the trade union movement has been achieved despite accusations of 'anti-Semitism' from Israel's supporters. Wehave easily shown how these accusations have no validity and it has been Jewish anti-Zionists and supporters of the Palestinians who have deflected this charge more than anyone else. This is a matter of record.

The only possible effect of Atzmon will be to prove that there is some truth to what the Zionists have been saying. If the trade unions were to believe that PSC or the wider solidarity movement tolerated the presence and activities of anti-Semites, then it would seriously damage the support we can count on from the unions. This is what Jon Benjamin wants and this is and can be the only 'positive' contribution that Atzmon and his ego can or will make to the Palestinian cause.PSC and the wider movement are not a 'free speech' movement. We are not a random debating society. Our purpose is solidarity, in its many and various forms. Those who represent a threat to that solidarity have no place in the movement. That is why holocaust deniers and open racists should be expelled without a moments thought.

I have absolutely no problems when the Jewish Chronicle quotes this blog as it did this week when it wrote that ‘Jewish anti-Zionist and PSC activist Tony Greenstein called Ms Booth's attack "venomous" and said it was "based on a core racist commitment." He wrote on his blog: "PSC needs to take decisive action to root out, once and for all, those who evince sympathy for racism - of whatever description. Gilad Atzmon is deeply antisemitic. He subscribes to every myth and libel that has ever been written about Jews, from the world Jewish conspiracy theory, to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion to the Holocaust itself." I only wish the JC reported the truth a little more often.

Stuart’s article is noteworthy for its empty rhetoric. PSC is guilty of ‘appeasement’. If she had any sense of history or even a grain of political knowledge she would know that ‘appeasement’ was the term that politicians like Sir Anthony Eden used in 1956 when justifying war against Egypt. Gamel Abdel-Nasser had just nationalised the Suez Canal and he was portrayed as the ‘new Hitler’ and it would be ‘appeasement’ to allow him to control the Canal.

And in what way has PSC ‘appeased’ the Zionists? Its crime is dissociating itself from Gilad Atzmon. and racism generally. Stuart asks ‘What possible reason is there for that statement?… why didn’t it distance itself from Sheikh Raed Salah? In reality, Gilad Atzmon has huge support at PSC branches around the UK.’

This is both superficial and untrue. Raed Salah faces attacks from the Israeli state continuously. Atzmon has never been persecuted by the Israeli state. A small difference, true. Israel tried to assassinate Raed Saleh on board the Mavi Marmara and shot someone else instead in a case of mistaken identity. http://azvsas.blogspot.com/2010/06/mark-regev-israels-goebbels_04.html He has been arrested an gaoled for being a symbol of resistance. Atzmon has done, well nothing, to campaign against Zionism, apart from trying to divide the movement. A good example of that is the statement that Atzmon has ‘huge support’ in PSC branches. Not so. There is the odd individual who, like Frances Clarke Lowes, has been subject to disciplinary action. But it is noteworthy that Lowes, despite having been former Chair of both National PSC and Brighton PSC was expelled without any criticism from other members of Brighton PSC.

But this doesn’t stop Stuart from protesting that:

‘You see now? There can be no appeasement, there can be no weakest link, and anything said to curry favour with Zionists fails miserably and only creates more demands. Gilad Atzmon is not anti-Semitic – if he were, his book, The Wandering Who?, would not be have been endorsed by some of the top humanists and academics of our time.’

Apart from the fact that Atzmon’s ridiculous book may have been endorsed by those who now regret have signed on the line, the fact is that they are not the world’s greatest humanists. The only one with even a claim in this regard is Prof. Richard Falk. Even Mearsheimer would make no such claim about himself.

But this doesn’t stop Stuart wittering that ‘Some very good activists have been encouraged to fall on their swords by the PSC leadership because they believe some aspects of the holocaust should be re-examined.’ One wonders what aspects these might be? And more to the point, what relevance would such an ‘examination’ have for support for the Palestinians? Stuart doesn’t say because the reality is that she was prompted in desperation by Atzmon to write the article.

Cui Bono – Who Benefits?

Atzmon accuses his critics of being ‘sayanim’ i.e. Israeli agents, as a way of dismissing all criticism. Ironically, if anyone has links with Israeli intelligence, it is likely to be Atzmon. Or put it another way – cui buono – who benefits from Atzmon’s work if not Israel and Zionism? Many Zionists welcome his activities precisely because he is seen as a useful ally (& idiot). It is a great tragedy that some exiled Palestinians fall so readily for Atzmon’s nonsense and thus undermine solidarity with those Palestinians who aren’t able to escape to the West.

I have written to Prof. Joseph Massad of Columbia University, in the wake of his excellent article in Al Ahram Semite’s and anti-Semites, that is the question’ to ask him to speak out with others of a similar mind. To date I have received no reply.

Bradford Furore Over Invitation from Raise Your Banners

What sparked off the latest attack on the Palestine solidarity movement was the decision of the ex-radical Bradford group, Raise Your Banners, to host Gilad Atzmon at a concert they were putting on on November 25th. Not unnaturally many people objected to a so-called left-wing and anti-racist group hosting someone who is happier these days in the company of neo-Nazis and who sends his articles to David Duke, ex-KKK Grand Wizard, Redress and other anti-Semitic or fascist sites for distribution.

This was picked up quite quickly by Hope Not Hate an anti--fascist site and its Editor Nick Lowles, who appears to have been deposed as Editor of Searchlight. The Searchlight stable, from which Nick Lowles originates, has been marked out in the past for its slavish support of the Israeli state and its refusal to even acknowledge the presence of racist attacks on Palestinians (in contrast to their coverage of Apartheid in South Africa). Searchlight appears to be once again under the control of one Gerry Gable.

In an article Pull the Plug on Gilad Atzmon Lowles states that he has, effectively, broken from the previous Searchlight policy of ignoring Jewish racism and using any and everything to attack supporters of the Palestinians. Whether that is true or not, time will tell.

In his article, Lowles tells how ‘Much of the criticism against our position stems from those who believe that we are part of some Zionist plot which seeks to silence criticism of Israel. Nothing can be further from the truth. To me, this has nothing to do with the Israel/Palestine conflict but merely opposition to a man who makes racist and antisemtic comments.’ Unlike Mark Gardner of the CST who seems unable to keep his mouth shut long enough to engage his brain, when it comes to exploiting anti-Semitism in order to support Zionism and Israel, Lowles asked ‘Let’s put aside the Israel/Palestine question (after all I have never once vocalised my opinion on this subject though my detractors are quick to accuse me of being part of a co-ordinated Zionist conspiracy).'

Despite having been part of the Searchlight stable, for whom Zionism is de rigeur, Lowles comments are a welcome break from the past. That is how it should be because the anti-fascist movement should not be riven by disputes over Zionism. That was certainly the position of Maurice Ludmer when he was editor of Searchlight.

I therefore sent a comment, 30.11.11. to the HnH site making a number of points and in particular that it has been Palestine solidarity activists who have been targeted by fascists. Indeed these same fascists have gone out of their way to support Israel. I also upbraided Nick Lowles about using, without attribution, source material on Atzmon. It is a normal academic and journalistic practice to acknowledge sources of information. Plagiarism is a rather damning charge. In a private note to Lowles I pointed out that saying “ 'even PSC' has distanced itself from Atzmon” suggests that there is something remarkable in this. Why?’ It also ran counter to Lowles professed stance. [see below] My comment was, for some mysterious reason, not published.

Atzmon’s Fascist Friends

David Duke can barely contain his enthusiasm for Atzmon. His site is stuffed with Atzmon’s articles. And Atzmon positively welcomes a review, which he links to on his site, of his book ‘The Wandering Who?’ by Kevin MacDonald in a white supremacist magazine Occidental Observer.

Atzmon has never shied away from the company of white supremacists. A fact that some of the more stupid Islamists, Laura Stuart et al., might care to bear in mind. When he decided to attack Lowles, it was no surprise that Atzmon would use material from the BNP front-group, Civil Liberty. Atzmon then tried to cover up his stupidity in his normal deceitful manner, except his original pieces had already been broadcast by his anti-Semitic conspiracy friends.

Atzmon has replied in his normal fashion, but rather disspirited response. The price of fame is beginning to wear him down as he is being forced to be accountable. In ‘Hope not hate – truth not lies more likely’ Atzmon launches into an attack on the Bradford trade union movement. In attacking a Trades Council, it looks like Atzmon is deliberately trying to sabotage support for the Palestinians inside the trade unions. And this is from someone who accuses Jewish anti-Zionists of being the fifth column!

And to idiots like Booth and Stuart and their outriders Sameh Habeeb and closet ‘intellectuals’ like Samir Abed-Rabbo, who believe that there is nothing incongruous about using fascist material against Zionists or alleged Zionists, I can only suggest they acquaint themselves with what the BNP actually stands for. One only need recall that at the time of Israel’s invasion of Lebanon, the BNP was 110% in support of Israel. We had articles like that in the Thurrock Patriot (6.1.09.) ‘Europes Jews Face Marxist Wrath Over Gaza’ or the spectacle of the BNP’s Legal Advisor Lee Barnard deploying all his racist talents in support of his new found Israeli friends:

I hope they wipe Hezbollah off the Lebanese map and bomb them until they leave large greasy craters in the cities where their Islamic extremist cantons of terror once stood. The 21st Century is the Islamic Century. Unless we start to resist the threat of Islamic extremism then within 100 years the West will have become Eurabia.

Atzmon’s use of BNP sources is not the first time he has been caught out. He has clear and obvious contacts with a mixture of neo-Nazis and white supremacists including David Duke, former Grand Wizard of the KKK. Gabriel Ash on Jewssansfrontieres has drawn my attention to a blog he did on one such example. In Judea declares War on Obama Atzmon writes that:

“Jewish texts tend to glaze over the fact that Hitler's March 28 1933, ordering a boycott against Jewish stores and goods, was an escalation in direct response to the declaration of war on Germany by the worldwide Jewish leadership.”

Possibly the reason for this ‘glazing over’ is because it is a classic Nazi lie, which according to Ash was peddled by a holocaust denial publication, the Barnes Review. (The Jewish Declaration of War on Nazi Germany The Economic Boycott of 1933, Jan./Feb. 2001, pp. 41-45) The Barnes Review is the brainchild of Willis Carto, an American white-supremacist. Carto advocates "ethno-nationalism". The neo-Nazis have a clear and obvious reason for telling this lie. If it is true that in fact 'the Jews' launched a war on Nazi Germany first, then of course the holocaust begins to make sense as 'retaliation' (at least in their eyes).

Atzmon argued that the attacks by the Nazis on the Jews, came about not because of the Nazi Party’s anti-Semitic ideology and belief, not because anti-Semitism wasn’t part of their programme, but because ‘the Jews’ had declared war on Germany by promoting an international economic boycott against Nazi Germany. This of course was Hitler and the German Right’s argument regarding the 1914-18 war. It was the Jews and the Left, the ‘stab in the back’ legend, who were responsible for Germany’s defeat. As Gabriel Ash notes, Atzmon ‘covers his tracks by not citing that source (The Barnes Review) directly, but referring to another site that cites it (but he does include assertions present only in the source article).’

That site is the Scriptorium! Its article ‘The Jewish Declaration of War on Nazi Germany’ The Economic Boycott of 1933 neatly reverses the truth. Far from the Jews having been annihilated by the Nazis, it was the former who launched a ‘war’ against Hitler. The final solution was emigration to Europe. But the Jews insisted on waging their own war and acting like a fifth column.

‘Entire books have been written on the topic of "why Germany lost the War" - or, conversely, "why the Allies won". This booklet exposes a vitally important, but often underestimated factor: the German traitors who worked to destroy the German Reich from within. Their attempted assassination of Adolf Hitler on July 20, 1944 was only the tip of the iceberg. More and more, it appears that the Allies would not have been victorious without their help - and that, in fact, the war might never even have come about without their machinations!’Any semi-decent historian, e.g. William Shirer's The Rise & Fall of Nazi Germany knows full well that the reason for the assassination plot was the fact that Hitler had lost the war in Russia at a cost of millions of young German lives, faced a second front in France and Germany was facing possible ruination. To attribute the loss of the war to Count Stauffenberg, General Beck and co. is, once again, to mistake cause and effect.

Of course there was no “declaration of war on Germany by the worldwide Jewish leadership.” Firstly, there was no worldwide Jewish leadership (another nazi bogeyman), and second, as Saul Friedlander writes (and as Lenni Brenner fleshes out: ‘most of the Jewish organizations in the United States were opposed to mass demonstrations and economic action.'

The article that Atzmon quotes from tells how ‘Not even Saul Friedlander in his otherwise comprehensive overview of German policy, Nazi Germany and the Jews, mentions the fact that the Jewish declaration of war and boycott preceded Hitler's speech of March 28, 1933.’ Discerning readers would be wise to ask why Friedlander felt this item of history was so irrelevant.

In fact, Friedlander wrote (pages 6-11 of the abridged edition of Nazi Germany and the Jews) that:

Much of the foreign press gave wide coverage to the Nazi violence [from early March]. American newspapers, in particular, did not mince words about the anti-Jewish persecution. Jewish and non-Jewish protests grew. These very protests became the Nazis’ pretext for the notorious April 1, 1933, boycott of Jewish businesses. In mid-March, Hitler had already allowed a committee headed by Julius Streicher, party chief of Franconia and editor of the party’s most vicious anti-Jewish newspaper, Der Stürmer, to proceed with preparatory work for it.

It would be funny, if he hadn’t destroyed his academic reputation in the stroke of a pen, that John Mearsheimer, described a writer who draws his "knowledge" of history exclusively from far right and white nationalist publications, as a “universalist” who “is the kind of person who intensely dislikes nationalism of any sort.” But we should be clear that the implosion of Mearsheimer does not mean that AIPAC is any less nefarious an organization than it was last week.Links to articles cited in this article1. http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/judea-declares-war-on-obama-by-gilad-atzmon.html2. The Barnes Review, "The Jewish Declaration of War on Nazi Germany", The Economic Boycott of 1933" archived at http://www.wintersonnenwende.com/scriptorium/english/archives/articles/jdecwar.html3. http://www.wintersonnenwende.com/scriptorium/english/archivesindex.html4. http://jewssansfrontieres.blogspot.com/2011/09/few-point-for-occasion-of-atzmon-saga.htmlComment Posted to Hope not Hate Site 30.11.11. – not printed‘I am happy to accept Nick's assurance that he has never 'vocalised' on the question of Palestine.

Palestine solidarity activists overwhelmingly reject Atzmon's poisonous anti-Semitism and racism. It is us who have been the target of EDL attacks and an EDL presence on counter-demonstrations to support for the Palestinians.

I know it's a small point but you refer Atzmon above to Atzmon's description of Eisen's Holocaust Wars as a 'great text'. In fact it was an e-mail sent to me on 5.6.05. Likewise it was in the same series of e-mails that he described Israel Shamir as a ‘unique and advanced thinker’. It is normal to attribute quotations to source but I'm sure that it was an oversight!

The reason why Atzmon has any support… within the wider Palestine solidarity periphery is because of years of accusations (by Zionists) of 'anti-Semitism' against anti-Zionists and supporters of the Palestinians. It has confused and disoriented people as to what anti-Semitism is.

However on Atzmon there is no doubt. Indeed he has not merely toyed with holocaust denial. I have no doubt that he is a holocaust denier.I have just posted an article on the latest developments vs Atzmon and I have also produced a Guide to the anti-Semitic Jazzman

Another of Atzmon’s associates is the infamous Nazi Israel Shamir, another Holocaust denier with links to many white supremacist and Nazi groups. Atzmon has described Shamir as a ‘unique and advanced thinker’.

Tony Greenstein

Also sent to HnHAlthough I didn't spell it out, Searchlight was extremely pro-Zionist under Gerry Gable. I can only assume that you have changed your position recently. However saying 'even PSC' has distanced itself from Atzmon suggests that there is something remarkable in this. Why? Atzmon is a source of division not support for the Palestinians and he consciously tries to set off Jewish and non-Jewish activists, albeit without any success.

I would have expected that the quotes about Shamir and Eisen would have been attributed to me but maybe you weren't aware of their provenance. However I and others inside the Palestine solidarity movement have been working for 6+ years against Atzmon and his ilk.

Gilad Atzmon is a campaigning antisemite and a supporter and promulgator of Holocaust denial material. For this reason, Hope not Hate and Bradford TUC have said:'We believe that Atzmon should be shunned by all decent people – just as we would shun David Irving and Nick Griffin.' Atzmon is incensed.

He has penned a lying, self serving attack on Hope not Hate and Bradford TUC:

'This weekend, Bradford TUC (Trade Union Council) joined the Israeli lobby’s attempt to silence me. This sort of thing is no surprise since my book ‘The Wandering Who’ exposes the devastating continuum between Israel, Diaspora Sayanim, Anti-Zionist Zionists (AZZ) and the influential and varied communities of Shabbos Goyim(1). So, is it a coincidence that last Shabbos (Sabbath) eve Paul Meszaros Bradford TUC’s secretary and some of his fellow unionists got very busy indeed doing the Zionists’ bidding?'

Here’s part of Atzmon’s attack on Hope not Hate’s Nick Lowles:Here is an extract from a recent expose of Nick Lowles:

“Until recently, as editor of Searchlight, Nick Lowles was very camera shy. Over the years, he also attempted to generate various false trails with regards to his true identity posing, at various times, as a member of the Union of Jewish Students, a trotskyite activist for a Workers’ Revolutionary Party splinter group keen on infiltrating the Labour Party and a supporter of the violent anarchist Anti-Fascist Action, whose members later planted bombs for the IRA in London. For those reasons, and his close association with the mainstream media, Lowles is distrusted amongst anarchist and other far-left activists who regard him as a tout.”The inaccurate “expose” to which Gilad Atzmon links is that of an organisation called Civil Liberty:

'The civil rights organisation Liberty refused to represent the British National Party in 2003 when Barclays Bank closed down their bank accounts. As a result of this failure to defend the right of the BNP as a democratic and lawful political party to hold bank accounts in Britain and to operate as a lawful political party and abide by the accounting rules of the Electoral Commission, other bank accounts of Palestinian charities supporting victims of the conflict in Israel were also closed down. From this we learn that a failure by the civil rights organisation Liberty to defend the principle of a right to a bank account for the BNP and all other lawful political and charitable organisations with bank accounts in Britain resulted in the denial of that right to a bank account not just to the BNP, but other organisations the banks wanted to close down as well.'

If that sounds like the sort of thing a BNP front organisation would write: that’s because it is. From The Guardian:'An investigation by the Guardian has revealed that the fundraising group Civil Liberty, which claims to be independent of any political party, is run by key BNP activists with all the money donated through its website going to the BNP’s regional headquarters in the north-east.It has raised concerns that the party appears to be attempting to profit from anti-Islamic sentiment in the United States since the attacks of September 11 2001, by presenting itself as being at the forefront of a campaign to save the UK from being “overwhelmed” by Muslims.Since 2001 it has been illegal for any political party to accept overseas donations of more than £200, and party officials breaking the law face a year’s imprisonment or a £5,000 fine. Both Civil Liberty and the BNP deny they are trying to bypass UK election law, insisting they are entirely separate organisations .However, the Guardian has established a series of links, including an audio tape of the BNP chairman, Nick Griffin, speaking at a US conference organised by a former member of the Ku Klux Klan, in which he calls on sympathisers to support BNP members by giving money to Civil Liberty.

“Please throw money at the BNP, actually don’t throw money at the BNP. Quite seriously it’s against the law, but you can as my colleague will be telling you tomorrow, throw money at a group called Civil Liberty which helps members of the BNP and that is within the law.”'

The Guardian also found that:

· Civil Liberty was set up and is run by Kevin Scott, who until September was the BNP’s north-east regional organiser.· Its PO box address is registered to Tyneside BNP at the home of Jonathan Keys, a former party candidate.· The site’s domain name is registered at the home in Stirling of Steve Blake, the BNP’s website editor.· The BNP’s head of administration, Kenny Smith, is named on the BNP website as the national treasurer of Civil Liberty and responds to emails sent to CL.

It is not clear how much money Civil Liberty has raised as its accounts are secret, but the American Friends of the British National party was estimated to have raised £80,000 to £100,000 for the BNP between 1998 and 2001 when it folded – money Mr Griffin said made a “significant contribution to the BNP’s [2001] general election campaign”.

Yesterday the BNP and Civil Liberty strenuously denied the allegations.“Civil Liberty is completely independent of the party,” said BNP spokesman Phil Edwards. “The BNP receives absolutely no money at all from Civil Liberty and any allegation that [money is being diverted] to the BNP in order to circumvent election laws will be met by a libel writ.” …Civil Liberty regularly advertises in BNP publications and has appealed for funds on the BNP website. Mark Collett, who was last year acquitted with Mr Griffin on charges of inciting racial hatred, is alleged to have handed out Civil Liberty flyers at a far right event in the US. And at the BNP’s annual conference in November, senior BNP figures accused the leadership of using Civil Liberty to build a fighting fund they said was not declared to the Electoral Commission or the wider membership.

Mr Edwards said: “Civil Liberty is an organisation which was set up to assist nationalists fight legal cases and employment tribunals and other civil cases … The fact that it is Kevin Scott [who set up Civil Liberty] … why shouldn’t it be?”

Atzmon is coated, head to toe, in fascist mire.

UPDATE

Oh dear. Stupid Gilad Atzmon is now trying to hide the fact that he takes his information on anti-fascist campaigners from the British National Party, by rewriting the paragraph and removing the link.

Unfortunately for Atzmon, his fascist fanboys have already republished his article, with the BNP quote and link intact.

Here it is on the “Truthseeker“.Here it is on the Nazi website, “Shoah“.Here it is on the Pacific Free Press website.Too late, you thick Nazi.PS – I see Atzmon is now being carried by David Icke. Just about his level, I reckon.

Yes but what concerns me is where I can pick up my back pay. I was wondering whether Jonathan Hoffman could point me in the right direction. Sami Ibrahim doesn't say how long I've been employed by Mossad but logic suggests at least half of my time as an anti-Zionist, say 20 years. I guess I can afford to retire now!

Well, thanks to the sterling work of shoah.org.uk it’s now clear that all that bickering between you and Jonafun was just part of the elaborate cover. I’ll have someone from AIPAC contact you (try and remember the secret handshake!), now your cover is blown and we owe you some US tax dollars...

Tony Greenstein is a recruit of Mossad indeed. Well it isn't much of a surprise to find Atzmon's racist Tsarist/Hitlerian conspiracy theory crud on websites belonging to Icke, Duke and Rense. That is believable.

In the Atzmon article quoted by TG (Hope not hate – truth not lies more likely) I noticed the way Atzmon is even prepared to exploit the murder of his own great grandparent, especially in his current desperate twists and turns to cover up the fact he denied the Holocaust took place.

Atzmon claims he's been quoted out of context, but when he does use a wider context, it does nothing to defend him against accusations of Holocaust denial.

As Tacitus said, criminals caught red-handed have only one hiding place left, audacity.

And anyway, doesn't Atzmon have a theory to explain why people assert publicly the Holocaust took place? Isn't this a sign of some kind of zionist influence and control on him? I would hate to think Atzmon, of all people, was now a zionist agent operating in zionised environment. I thought his ego was bigger than that. Unlike the rest of us mere zionist stooges, he's untouchable.

Thanks Gert. In these straitened times, it's always good to have an extra income. It's been pretty stressful maintaining this same appearance for 40 years so I hope Shin Bet pay well! At least better than income support.